G.R. No. 228296 - Grieg Philippines, Inc. vs. Gonzales

Case Summary (G.R. No. 228296)

Petitioner and Respondent

The prosecution charged Antonio de los Reyes with treason for allegedly levying war against and adhering to the enemies of the United States and the Philippine Islands by accepting a commission as a captain in the regular army of the so-called “Filipino republic” (Katipunan/Tagalog republic) and carrying arms between August 30, 1902 and November 21, 1902.

Key Dates

Relevant dates appearing in the record: August 30, 1902 (date on the captain’s commission); May 30 (date of an alleged attack by the organization on U.S. forces, year specified in the record as 1902); November 21, 1902 (date defendant was met and detained by the Constabulary detective in Bacord and later taken to his house where a trunk search occurred); March 8, 1902 (date of an Act of Congress invoked by the court governing admissibility of confessions).

Applicable Law

The court applied the statutory rule set forth in the Act of Congress of March 8, 1902, including the requirement that a confession must be made in open court to be admissible (section 9, Act of March 8, 1902), and the statutory provision that no person in the Philippine Islands shall be convicted of treason “unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act.” The court also cited general principles on treason from authorities (Blackstone).

Procedural History

The defendant was convicted in the Court of First Instance of Manila and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment and a $5,000 fine. The judgment was appealed to the court that rendered the decision summarized here.

Facts as Found by the Trial Court and Evidence Presented

A Constabulary detective testified that on November 21, 1902 he detained the defendant in Bacord after being informed the defendant was a captain in the Katipunan; the detective said he obtained from the defendant an admission that he was an officer of the Katipunan (the court excluded this confession because it did not comply with statutory requirements). The detective and others searched the defendant’s trunk and seized a revolver and a sealed captain’s commission.
The commission, introduced in evidence, bore signatures purporting to appoint Antonio de los Reyes a captain in the regular army of the Islands dated August 30, 1902, and included references to Cenon Nigdao as “S. K., Minister of War” and A. G. Del Rosario as “S. K., Supreme President.”
One prosecution witness testified from captured documents about a so-called Tagalog republic or Katipunan having armed forces approximating 300 men and recognized the seals on the commission.
Cenon Nigdao testified he was the “secretary of war” of the Katipunan, identified the signatures on the commission, and stated he had given the commission to the defendant and told him to keep it. Nigdao also described the Katipunan as a national party whose purpose was to defend the country’s rights and seek freedom from the United States; on cross-examination Nigdao admitted he commanded no forces, that he did not know that the defendant used the commission, and that the organization did not take up arms while they were in Manila.
Another witness testified he had held a commissioned rank without troops and that there was no army when Nigdao was in Bacord; he recounted surrendering himself and one revolver to the president when he found “nothing doing.”

Evidentiary Exclusion: Confession

The court expressly rejected the confession allegedly made by the defendant to the Constabulary officer because it was not made in open court “as required by law (sec. 9, act of Congress passed March 8, 1902).” The court treated the defendant’s out-of-court admission as inadmissible and thus did not rely upon it in sustaining the treason conviction.

Legal Issue Framed by the Court

Two primary legal questions guided the court’s analysis: (1) whether the evidence established the statutory requirement of two witnesses to the same overt act of treason; and (2) whether the acts proved (principally, acceptance and retention of the printed commission and possession of a revolver) constituted an overt act of treason—i.e., levying war against the government or adher[ing] to and giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and the Philippine Islands.

Statutory Two-Witness Requirement and Its Application

The court applied the statute requiring conviction for treason to be founded on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act. After exclusion of the defendant’s confession, the only direct acts proved were (a) Nigdao’s testimony that he issued the commission to the defendant, and (b) the testimony of another witness who found the commission in the defendant’s trunk. The court concluded that these pieces of evidence did not satisfy the statutory two-witness requirement as to any overt act of levying war: there was no proof of an overt act of treason witnessed by two persons that would meet the statute’s requirement.

Overt Act Requirement and Sufficiency of Evidence

The court held that mere acceptance and retention of a commission, without more, did not constitute an overt act of treason. The record showed conflicting characterizations of the organization (Katipunan, Tagalog republic, National party) and substantial evidence that the organization lacked organized armed forces capable of levying war. Several witnesses (including Nigdao) admitted there were no forces in Manila and that commissioned persons had no troops or had surrendered. Given these facts, the court concluded the acceptance of a paper commission and possession of a revolver, standing a

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 228296)

Citation and Case Data

Reported in 3 Phil. 349; G.R. No. 1434; decision dated February 23, 1904.
Title: The United States, complainant and appellee, vs. Antonio de los Reyes, defendant and appellant.
Opinion authored by Justice McDonough.
Justices Arellano, C.J., Torres, Willard, and Mapa concurred; Justice Johnson disqualified.

Procedural Posture

Defendant was tried and convicted in the Court of First Instance of Manila.
Conviction: guilty of treason.
Sentence imposed by the trial court: imprisonment for twenty years and a fine of $5,000.
Appeal taken to this Court, which reviews the sufficiency of the evidence and the legal basis for conviction.

Offense Charged (Allegations)

Defendant charged with treason, alleged to have, on November 21, 1902, in Manila, feloniously and treasonably levied war against, adhered to, and given aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and of the Philippine Islands.
Specific factual allegation: that on or about August 30, 1902, defendant accepted a commission in the regular army of the "Filipino republic," served as a captain, carried arms in such army, and continued in such office and to carry arms between August 30, 1902 and November 21, 1902.
The alleged "Filipino republic" described in the charge as an attempted government organized by various persons against the authority of the United States Government and of the Philippine Islands, with the object of overthrowing the regularly constituted government by armed insurrection.

Evidence Introduced at Trial — Overview

Prosecution evidence chiefly consisted of testimony from Constabulary officers/detectives, identification of a commissioned paper (Exhibit A), testimony of Cenon Nigdao (who identified signatures on Exhibit A and described the organization), and testimony of a witness acquainted with captured documents regarding a so-called Tagalog republic or Katipunan.
Confession: a purported admission by the defendant to a Constabulary detective that he was an officer of the Katipunan; the Court below relied upon this among other evidence.
Physical items seized and introduced: a revolver and a captain’s commission (under seals) found in defendant’s trunk.

Constabulary Detective Testimony (Key Details)

A Constabulary detective testified he met the defendant in Bacord, city of Manila, on November 21, 1902.
Upon being told by a companion that defendant was a captain in the Katipunan Society, the officers detained the defendant, took him aside into a clump of trees, talked to him, and allegedly obtained from him an admission that he was an officer of the Katipunan.
The officers then took the defendant to his house, searched his trunk, and found and took away a revolver and a captain’s commission under seals.
The same detective testified he had not seen the defendant with insurgent forces.
The detective identified that one Cenon Nigdao was a lieutenant-colonel in command of the whole Katipunan forces but was then captured and a prisoner at Pasig.
When asked what the Katipunan Society is, the detective described it as an organization forming an independent government for the Philippines, keeping headquarters or whereabouts secret from the American Government, seeking to gain forces and arms by any means, and sometimes using force to secure members.
The detective testified they (the Katipunan) made an attack on May 30 upon a Government force of the United States Army.

Documentary Evidence — The Captain’s Commission (Exhibit A)

A copy of the commission found in the defendant’s trunk was produced and its full wording is included in the record.
The commission recites appointment of Antonio de los Reyes as captain in the regular army of these Islands, issued by the "Supreme Presidency of the Philippine Islands," dated "K. K., the 30th of August, 1902," signed by Cenon Nigdao, Minister of War, and A. G. Del Rosario, S.K., Supreme President, and directing persons to render corresponding honors and obey orders issued by the appointee.
The commission bears seals that a witness testified he recognized as those of the organization.

Testim